"Voting Machine-Gate?": Re-Set Machine Poses Problem for AG Inquiry

When Assistant Attorney General Joel Graber appeared in Geneva yesterday, January 21, to investigate the Geneva City Council election of November 6, 2007, he was in for a big surprise. So were we. The voting machine he had come to test had already been re-set by Ontario County Election Commission employees. That made it impossible for Graber to verify allegations of a machine malfunction on Election Day because the machine was no longer set up as it had been when voting took place. Some voters had complained, and later filed formal statements, that they were unable to vote for Rocco Chip Capraro on Row A of machine #76460. The machine was eventually replaced with another machine on Election Day.

In the weeks following the election, Capraro called upon Ontario County election officials and the Attorney General to provide answers to three basic questions: (1) In what ways were voting machines malfunctioning on Election Day?; (2) How do election officials explain discrepancies in various reports of election results?; (3) Did Ontario County election officials respond appropriately to voter complaints on Election Day? (For background information on this issue, see "Margin of Error May Be Larger Than Margin of Victory," "If the Machine is Broken, Fix It," and "Will Candidates Get Answers Before Election is Certified?")

After reviewing evidence, the Attorney General’s Office launched an investigation into the election, starting with the testing of the machines. With the machines safely sealed and stored at the City garage in Geneva since Election Day, Sam Bonney, Capraro’s attorney, reached an understanding with County Election Commissioners Mary Salotti and Mike Northrup that the County would hold off on re-setting the machines until the Attorney General had decided whether or not to investigate. Unfortunately, the County went ahead and re-set the machines before Graber could make it to Geneva.

The correspondence between Bonney and the Commissioners documents all this (you can click on the links in the next paragraphs to read the letters). In a letter received by Bonney on January 11, 2008, the Election Commissioners had advised Bonney that it would soon be time to prepare the voting machines for the New York State Presidential Primary (February 5, 2008). They asked Bonney for an update on the Attorney General’s intentions.

Bonney responded immediately. He spoke with Northrup, and indicated that he (Bonney) had not yet heard from the Attorney General’s Office. The two agreed that Election Commissioners would hold off “as long as possible’ before re-setting the machines. Bonney confirmed that conversation in a letter faxed to the Commissioners the same day.

The following week, Assistant Attorney General Graber confirmed his appearance in Geneva for Tuesday, January 22nd. He spoke both with the Ontario County Board of Elections and with Sam Bonney.

His visit began at the Board of Elections office in Canandaigua. Graber made clear the purpose of his visit was to “gather evidence” by having the alleged malfunctioning machine tested. The group then headed to Geneva. Present in the Geneva City garage were: Graber, his investigator, his stenographer, Salotti, Northrup, two Ontario County attorneys, Councilor-at-Large Ron Alcock, two Ontario County machine technicians, Bonney, and Capraro. All standing there in the garage.

After a preliminary discussion of the voter complaints about the allegedly malfunctioning machine, the group turned to the machine taken out of service. It was then technician John Ruggieri disclosed to the group that he has “stripped the machine” and re-set it in anticipation of the upcoming New York State Presidential Primary (February 5). That sent a chill through the already cold and damp garage. The machine was irreversibly re-set from what it had been on Election Day, and test results would be virtually meaningless. After a great deal of discussion about the state of the machine, and its implications, the meeting came to a close, without a test of the machine most in question.

We have to wonder, even if the broken machine needed to be put back into service for the primary along with all the other machines in the City, why was it among the very first to be re-set? Only 5 machines had been re-set at that moment, with at least another 8 still to go. In other words, it could have waited. The biggest question of all is this:

Why was the machine re-set AFTER Salotti and Northrup
had been notified by Bonney that the Attorney General
might be inspecting it, and after they had been asked
by Bonney to hold off servicing the machine?

Was it intentional? Was it accidental? Was it miscommunication? Who knows-- but we expect an answer. Whatever the explanation, from our fact-based point of view, the situation was mishandled. Voters and open government were done a great disservice.

Not to mention the fact that Graber came all that way for a purpose that could not be fulfilled. No to mention the fact that an investigation of voter complaints about the machine was now impossible.

The proper functioning of the machine was doubtful since Election Day. The outcome of an election may have hinged upon it. Ever since, there has been a reluctance on the part of Ontario County election officials to offer an open, transparent account of what happened that day. That’s precisely why the Attorney general was contacted. Even then, by their own actions, whether intentional or not, the Ontario County Election Commission made a full inquiry into the machine by the Attorney General’s Office impossible. The words “Voting Machine-Gate” come to mind.

With an upcoming Presidential primary, would you trust that machine to accurately record the votes for your candidate? Know your voter rights and what to do if you suspect a machine malfunction.